Bringing Sustainable Management of Contaminated Sites into Practice – The Role of Policy and Regulations

The European Union (EU) has placed a strong focus on soil contamination and remediation in its Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection, emphasizing the critical need for comprehensive soil data at the EU level. To effectively support EU soil management strategies, it is necessary to develop soil-related indicators and standardized datasets across all EU member states. However, the lack of standardized methodologies for estimating the time required for contaminated site remediation is a dilemma in Italy and throughout Europe. This study examines statistical data on the time-consuming nature of the contaminated site remediation process in Italy. In fact, early intervention not only simplifies site remediation but also reduces long-term financial obligations such as monitoring costs and potential legal implications. This study categorized data according to remedial procedures, explored different management phases, and revealed different timescales for completing the procedure. The findings show that processes completed after preliminary investigations are often shorter in time than those completed following conceptual model assessments. In contrast, processes that require corrective measures typically take a longer period of time to complete. Notably, remedial interventions tend to have a shorter duration compared to risk management interventions. Furthermore, procedures that address both soil and groundwater contamination generally require more time compared to those that focus only on soil remediation. This study provides valuable insight into the time-consuming aspects of remediation procedures, recommending potential changes to regulatory frameworks to accelerate site remediation activities.

Soil information in support of policy making and awareness raising

Under the European Union (EU) Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection, the European Commission has identified soil contamination as a priority for the collection of policy-relevant soil data at European scale. In order to support EU soil management policies, soil-related indicators need to be developed which requires appropriate data collection and establishment of harmonized datasets for the EU Member States. In 2011-12, the European Soil Data Centre of the European Commission conducted a project to collect data on contaminated sites from national institutions in Europe using the European Environment Information and Observation Network for soil (EIONET-SOIL). This paper presents the results obtained from analysing the soil contaminated sites data submitted by participating countries. According to the received data, the number of estimated potential contaminated sites is more than 2.5 million and the identified contaminated sites around 342 thousand. Municipal and industrial wastes contribute most to soil contamination (38%), followed by the industrial/commercial sector (34%). Mineral oil and heavy metals are the main contaminants contributing around 60% to soil contamination. In terms of budget, the management of contaminated sites is estimated to cost around 6 billion Euros (€) annually.

Soil protection policies have been developed at National level in a number of countries. The US Soil Conservation Act, the German Federal Soil Protection Act, and the Soil Action Plan for England are just some examples of such policies. International policies for a sustainable use of soil resources have been developed both at regional level and at global level. The Alpine Convention and the upcoming EU Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection are two examples of regional policies addressing soil protection. No specific binding global policy exists for soil protection. Nevertheless, a number of environmental protection policies address soil-protection aspects, like the climate-change convention, the biodiversity convention and the desertification convention. Further development of the EU Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection will make it possible to explore new methods of international cooperation in this field.

Preface

Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic—Unique Opportunities for Unifying, Revamping and Reshaping Epidemic Preparedness of Europe’s Public Health Systems

Soil is a multifunctional, non-renewable natural resource for Europe as clearly expressed in the European Union (EU) Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection (COM (2006)231). Soil carries out multiple functions, including the support of food production. Urban development and its associated land take poses a major threat to soil and could have significant effects on agricultural production. This paper aims to evaluate the potential productivity losses in European agriculture due to land-take processes between 1990 and 2006. Agricultural land take was calculated using CORINE Land Cover maps of 1990, 2000 and 2006. For 21 of the 27 EU member states, agricultural land take was computed to be 752,973 ha for 1990–2000 and 436,095 ha for 2000–2006, representing 70.8% and 53.5%, respectively, of the total EU land take for these periods. The impact of this land take on the production capabilities of the agricultural sector for the period 1990–2006 for 19 of the 21 states was estimated to be equivalent to a loss of more than six million tonnes of wheat. The paper demonstrates that Europe's intense urbanisation has a direct impact on its capability to produce food.

A SHIFT towards interest-driven, opportunity-based and more voluntary actions by combining bottom-up with top-down elements (Falkner, 2016).Interactive learning and experimentation at different levels of global governance have become highly important, and these complex global interactions are increasingly regarded not as obstacles but as opportunities for innovation and interactive learning (Sovacool, 2011).Global climate governance relates not only to the legal system of the climate regime but also to various public and private initiatives at different scales and across sectors.Scholars studying the complex multi-actor and multi-sector characteristics of the system have therefore begun to conceptualize global multi-level climate governance as an opportunity structure for the generation and diffusion of climate-related innovation.The topic of this special issues is climate governance within a multi-level and multi-sectoral global system.The work argues that global climate governance today aims essentially to activate the dynamic potential of each level of the global governance system, the level of world regions as well as the level of provinces and local communities.Horizontal peer-to-peer learning between countries, cities and regions, as well as vertical up-scaling of best practice, has created a dynamic of change.The cross-sectoral approach has become important as far as the mobilizing of economic interests (e.g. in the construction sector) and the use of co-benefits is concerned.This special issue intends to offer a better understanding of the nature and variety of, and linkages between, initiatives taken and governance functions delivered within the broader 'climate governance landscape ' (Betsill et al., 2015).It analyses various climate governance activities in the European Union (EU), India and China through a systemic perspective.The EU may be regarded as the strongest regional sub-system of the global system, although the BRICS countries of China and India play a comparable role, as countries both with a similar scope and with explicit multi-level climate policy activities.The systematic dimension of global climate governance is described in the introductory article 'Multi-level climate governance as a global system' by Martin Jnicke.The author analyses the potential of the global climate governance system, which is characterized by a multiplicity of access points and incentives for innovation and interactive learning.It is regarded as a 'multi-impulse-system', where the sum of even weak impulses from different parts of the system can play the role of a strong instrument.The global multi-level climate governance structure is also characterized by a specific global knowledge base and a global policy arena, allowing for climate-related agenda-setting and the mobilization of interests at each level.It is taken as an opportunity structure for ambitious innovation-based climate strategies based on interactive lesson-drawing from best practice.The lesson to be learned at all levels of the system is the potential for economic co-benefits related to the socio-technical system of clean-energy innovation and the global clean-energy market.The following article, 'The EU system of multi-level climate governance', by Martin Jnicke and Rainer Quitzow provides an overview of the regional structure of the global climate governance system.The authors understand the EU as a system where 'multi-level reinforcement' has been observed several times and which can be considered as a leader by example in global climate governance.They point to the fact that the EU has the world's highest share of green electricity and since 1990 has made the largest reduction to its greenhouse gas emissions.They attribute the EU's relatively successful performance in climate and energy governance to two main factors: (1) multi-level reinforcement and (2) the mobilization of economic interests at different levels of governance through low-carbon industrial policy.While the multi-impulse system has fostered

Sustainable urban logistics is imperative to meet urban sustainability goals. In the European context, the European Union (EU) set an ambitious target in 2011 of essentially CO2-free urban logistics by 2030. However, it is unclear how effectively such EU targets for urban logistics have shaped national- and urban-level policymaking. This paper investigates whether there is evidence of localization of these supranational goals for urban logistics at the national and local levels. Drawing on the ‘steering effects’ framework, we seek such effects across four dimensions—institutional, discursive, relational and resources. Empirically, we conduct a thematic analysis of transport-related documents across three governance levels—the EU, the national level of Norway and the local level comprising four Norwegian cities. Our findings show that the EU's urban logistics goals are reflected in changing policy behaviour at the national and local levels over time. Yet this is more evident in some areas than in others: the discursive effect is most evident at both the national and local levels, whereas the institutional effects at both these levels remain fragmented and weak. Therefore, the EU's goalsetting does matter, but we have yet to see strong effects beyond the discursive.

The EU Response to COVID-19: From Reactive Policies to Strategic Decision-Making.

Industrially contaminated sites and health.

In this chapter we address political and educational science relevant questions about the influence of educational (neoliberal) governance in the European Union (EU) on the development of national educational policies and practices. The identified question is examined by theoretical dispositions of new modes of EU governance as governance of goals, comparisons, problems/crisis and knowledge (e.g. Grek, 2009; Nordin, 2014; Ozga, 2011) and discursive institutionalism (e.g. Schmidt, 2008; 2012) as a promising ‘multifaceted set of concepts to explore the lending and borrowing of transnational education policies and their application at the national and local levels’ (Wahlstörm and Sundberg, 2018). Applied theoretical framework explains how policy discourses can perform coordinating and communicative functions and lead to institutional change. Concretely, it contributes to understanding how certain EU (neoliberal) policy models (involving cognitive scripts, categories and ideas about EU strategic goals and solutions to identified policy problems) shape identities, structures and behaviours at the national level of EU member states (e.g. Alasuutari, 2015). As such the chapter tries to recognise ‘how the global discourses of neo-liberalism have been made possible through the re-articulation and re-contextualisation of local historical contestation and politics’ (Takayama, 2009) and provides an understanding of how neoliberal cognitive and normative discourses (Schmidt, 2008) motivate national level actors to comply with the EU agendas instead of protecting the sovereignty of the national educational space. The theoretical dispositions are demonstrated in the case study of Slovenia, which presents an interesting case of studying interference between traditional post-socialist values and the Western EU (neoliberal) model of education.

Soil is an environmental resource and plays ecological, social and economic functions which are fundamental for the life. To guarantee its availability to future generations, soil resource needs sustainable management. The CEC Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection identifies a series of soil degradation processes or threats, which must be identified and combated. These include erosion, decline in organic matter, local and diffuse contamination, sealing, compaction, decline in biodiversity, salinisation, floods and landslides. With respect to management of contamination with potentially toxic elements, an approach based on the identification and quantification of the various forms or, at least, the main pools, in which contaminants occur in soil, is envisaged. The residence time of an element in soil depends, indeed, by the mobility of its predominant forms. Speciation studies provide information on the mobility and biological availability of contaminants, and seek to assess not simply the contamination level, but rather the risk/toxicity of a polluted soil and to predict its reduction after application of remediation techniques. Soil degradation is often associated with a decrease in the organic matter content, mainly caused by soil use change and global warming. Improving the accumulation of organic matter in soil or contrasting its reduction has positive effects on soil and water quality, crop yields, biodiversity and climate leading to a reduction of green-house gas emissions from soil to the atmosphere. In order to obtain a real accumulation of organic matter in soil, it is not sufficient to temporarily increase its total content, but it is necessary to favour the main processes which govern organic matter stabilization. This requires an approach at both molecular and multidisciplinary level. The reforestation of agricultural and highly degraded soils or conservative agronomic practices, such as the use of humified compounds characterized by an important hydrophobic component, the incorporation of crop residues, no-tillage, and crop rotations may have beneficial effects and increase organic matter levels, through the selective preservation of biochemical compounds more resistant to degradation, the slowing down of the turnover of organic matter already present in soil, physical and chemical protection due to aggregation and interaction of organic matter with the mineral phase.

European policies can be relevant to protect soils under climate change scenarios and therefore preserve the wide variety of functions and services provided by the soil. The European Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection will require member states to identify areas under risk from various soil threats and establish procedures to achieve sustainability. Five models Terraza, Cervatana, Sierra, Raizal, and Pantanal included in the Mediterranean Land Evaluation Information System decision support system packages were used to identify areas vulnerable to various soil threats under climate change scenarios in the Andalusia region. While Terraza and Cervatana forecast general land use capability for a broad series of possible agricultural uses, the Sierra model predicts forestry land suitability for the presence/absence of 22 typical Mediterranean forest species. Raizal and Pantanal models predict soil erosion vulnerability, contamination, and other processes. Interpretation of results in different scenarios allows quantifying the effects of climate change in terms of agricultural productivity, forestry land suitability, erosion, and contamination risks. The obtained results allow to identify detailed vulnerable areas and formulate site‐specific management plans for soil protection. Climate change is expected to impact crop growth with a higher impact on summer crops (corn, sunflower, and cotton). The results show a potential opportunity for reforestation (Quercus spp.) in future climate scenarios, while other species such as Castanea sativa will not be suitable in the study area by 2070 and 2100. Soil contamination and erosion show only slight differences between the current and future scenario of climate change. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

200th ENMC International Workshop “European Reference Networks: Recommendations and Criteria in the Neuromuscular field”, 18–20 October 2013, Naarden, the Netherlands